The Non-Debate
It was not a debate. Just as television in prime time has been largely emptied of drama and innovative comedy, with a few exceptions, in favor of empty-headed "reality shows," so the political debates have mostly been gutted.
Judging "how the candidates did" is rather like weighing in on the wittiness of the libretto of "Big Brother" or the pace of character development in the latest episode of "Keeping up with the Kardashians." The genre of the political review assumes that both candidates are credible in their roles. It becomes self-parody when one candidate is a ditzy nonentity cynically foisted on the public in the same way a 'reality show' is, based on a targeted demographic and without regard to quality.
It reminded me of the excruciating first episodes every season of "American Idol," when a single candidate is found who has the voice of an angel and then everyone else auditioned sounds like fingernails on a blackboard.
The news organizations and civic groups that sponsor political debates have allowed the campaigns to push them around so vigorously that nothing like a debate is any longer possible. The Bushies even tried to force the networks to hide the fact that John Kerry was taller than his rival in 2004. It is not about debating but about how your candidate looks on television.
Not only was there no debate but Sarah Palin was not required actually to answer any of the questions put to her, and she announced before she began that she was just going to throw up on us all the talking points that she had binged on in Arizona for the past few days.
She mugged for the camera, winked like a bar fly, and just went on talking and talking and talking, oblivious to whatever anyone else said. Not only did she ignore most of Gwen Ifill's questions,she paid no attention to what Joe Biden said. When he choked up over the loss of his family, she did not have the decency to express any kind of condolences. It is almost as though she is narcissistic and unable to connect with human beings.
Not only was it not a debate and not only did Palin answer virtually none of the questions put to her, but the whole idea of such an event was ridiculous.
Joe Biden has been either the chairman or the ranking minority member on the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee for many years, and is one of our foremost foreign affairs experts and legislators. His acumen and expertise are wide-ranging.
Palin has revealed her real self in the Gibson and Couric interviews, and clearly knows nothing and offers only rubbery expressions and glib repetition, for all the world like a rasping myna bird, of a stream of memorized slogans that sound as though they were disinterred from a time capsule originally buried in William F. Buckley Jr.'s back yard several decades ago.
It was not a debate, and pretending that it was and judging "performance" is to fall into the trap set by the campaign spinmeisters and talking point pimps.


39 Comments:
"Winked like a bar fly"
and,
"talking point pimps"
Ouch!
I guess you are obliged to document this farce for posterity. I didn't watch it. Why would anyone watch it who didn't have to document it?
Joe Biden has been either the chairman or the ranking minority member on the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee for many years, and is one of our foremost foreign affairs experts and legislators. His acumen and expertise are wide-ranging.
Joe Biden is a stooge of the AIPAC as is his running mate and I wouldn't vote for either if they were the only ones on the ticket.
Which is exactly what the Demoblicans are trying to convince me is the case.
Baldwin/Barr/McKinney/Nader are all on the ticket. I like Ralph Nader and Mat Gonzalez. I will never again vote for someone I don't want to be president.
Say what you will... the "lessor of two evils" is the reason we are in the straits we are today.
The American people should be very grateful to Palin. Seriously. The years-long American election process is pure marketing, and has been for decades. It is showbiz. The people get fully absorbed by the Stage, and follow the Reality Show religiously, and discuss it endlessly. It works in America.
Palin's extreme ignorance is one step too far, and the whole thing may fall apart now. Outsiders, like myself, are astonished at the lack of dignity and decorum of the Americans. Aren't you embarrassed to have Palin as a VP candidate?
Sure, other countries also have freaks at the top level, but they do not parade their ignorance for the whole world to see.
Generally, we have returned to the pre-TV era for our evening's activities, and we are more educated and at ease as a result. It took all of 5 seconds of "discussion" as to viewing the debate. In our opinions, the debates stopped being such when third (actually, the second) party candidates were excluded.
But you have judged "performance." On Palin's part, you report there was none, whereas Biden provided an emotional confession that was met with a similar lack of "performance" by Palin. From your report, I can conclude that Biden is a normal human, while Palin is a stolid, stodgy wall flower. The students I've observed with her reported behaviors are usually druggies hiding some very dark secret that tortures their being. Yet, somehow her and her husband have ammased assets valued over $1 million.
To read what The LA Times reports: "Focused sharply on the middle class, Sarah Palin and Joe Biden fought over taxes, military strategy and which party could better rebuild America...," it would seem you and the reporter veiwed two seperate events. Although, It seems this LA Times Editorial agrees with you somewhat: " If these two candidates ... combined to produce one of the worst debates in modern American presidential history, they did at least reveal the goals of the participants, as Palin reached for folksiness and Biden appealed to the cerebral." Sigh....
I remind myself that if I were still teaching I would have to watch such inanities. So I empathize, and as solace offer you this link to the fascinating story of what, who and how the current financial mess was manufactured. It would be nice if there was an abridged version, but then the story wouldn't be as lurid.
Joe Biden has been either the chairman or the ranking minority member on the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee for many years, and is one of our foremost foreign affairs experts and legislators. His acumen and expertise are wide-ranging.
I fell asleep and missed the dog-and-walrus show. I am willing to believe that "It was not a debate."
Still, whatever it was, the expertise-ridden chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee appears to have put himself on record as follows:
Q: What's the greater threat, a nuclear Iran or an unstable Afghanistan? Explain why.
BIDEN: Well, they're both extremely dangerous. I ... have been focusing .. for a long time, along with Barack, on Pakistan. Pakistan already has nuclear weapons. Pakistan already has deployed nuclear weapons. Pakistan's weapons can already hit Israel and the Mediterranean. Iran getting a nuclear weapon would be very, very destabilizing. They are more than - they are not close to getting a nuclear weapon that's able to be deployed. So they're both very dangerous. They both would be game changers.
But look, here's what the fundamental problem I have with John's policy about terror instability. John continues to tell us that the central war in the front on terror is in Iraq. I promise you, if an attack comes in the homeland, it's going to come as our security services have said, it is going to come from al Qaeda planning in the hills of Afghanistan and Pakistan. That's where they live. That's where they are. That's where it will come from. And right now that resides in Pakistan, a stable government needs to be established. We need to support that democracy by helping them not only with their military but with their governance and their economic well-being.
There have been 7,000 madrasses built along that border. We should be helping them build schools to compete for those hearts and minds of the people in the region so that we're actually able to take on terrorism and by the way, that's where bin Laden lives and we will go at him if we have actual intelligence.
___
SHE says "nuclear Iran, unstable Afghanistan?"
HE says Pakistan can nuke the Mediterranean. He worries that Wazíristán -- or some highland province thereabouts, ‘Pakghafistán’ anybody? -- is going to attack God’s Country any moment now -- now that the Med is no longer our national moat, no doubt. However if we build a few thousand antimadrasas on the Northwest Frontier -- in less than a moment -- maybe we can survive. Maybe. Plus naturally we will have to deprive M. de Zardárí of any delusions he may cherish about the sovereignty and independence and democracy and constitutionalism of his neorégime. Not to even mention ‘stability’.
(That is some part of why *I* don’t like this product. Wingnut City and Rio Limbaugh will complain that there is not a word of reply about the evil Qommies.)
It is inconceivable that Mr. Biden does not know better than he talks.
Well, OK. OK for him personally, but where does it leave the United States of America? This intervention-crazed drool is what Joe -- "along with Barák" -- thinks Televisionland and the electorate want to hear. Below a high level of political literacy, foreigners will regard it as indicative of the preferred foreign and aggression policies of the Democratic Party. Having so regarded, they may be excused for hoping that the US economy collapses definitively before Obama, Biden and Associates grab control of the Pentagon and no government on the planet can ever feel safe again. (‘Stability’, forsooth!)
Meanwhile, the walrus seems not to have been interested in anyplace east of Ahmadí-Nezhád, and accordingly it managed to avoid sayin’ anythin’ directly comparable in folly and narcissism. The dumb critter has also the advantage of NOT bein’ chairman of the Senate Foreign Relation Committeee, therefore far less likely to be misinterpreted among the Lesser Breeds Without.
Speaking of the L.B.W.,
Débat des vice-présidents : Biden convainc[e] la presse et les internautes
LEMONDE.FR avec AFP et Reuters | 03.10.08 | 08h01 • Mis à jour le 03.10.08 | 08h39
Que pouvait on attendre d'un débat entre une "hockey mom" de l'Alaska qui chasse l'élan et manie le M16 et un politicien membre du Sénat depuis trente-six ans ? Un débat viril mais correct. Reste à savoir qui des deux a gagné? Les deux camps ont naturellement revendiqué la victoire, jeudi 3 octobre, à l'issue de l'unique débat télévisé entre les candidats à la vice-présidence des Etats-Unis, la républicaine Sarah Palin et le démocrate Joe Biden.
Pour la presse, le vainqueur est clairement Joe Biden. Si les grands titres évitent de donner un verdict, le Wall Street Journal demande à ses lecteurs de voter pour déterminer le vainqueur. Pour 50,8 % des 75 000 internautes répondant au sondage, c'est Joe Biden qui l'a emporté. Selon des sondages de CNN, M. Biden est sorti vainqueur du face-à-face mais note la chaîne d'information, 84% des téléspectateurs estiment que Mme Palin s'en était tirée mieux que prévu. D'autres, comme le New York Times sont plus circonspects. Le quotidien a vu un débat "cordial mais mordant", tandis que le Washington Post estime que les deux candidats ont limité la casse et tenté de parler à la classe moyenne. Pour USA Today, Biden et Palin ont évité de tomber dans leurs travers naturels, tout en notant qu'ils avaient moins retenus leurs coups que McCain et Obama lors de leur débat. Pour le Guardian, à Londres, la victoire de Biden est encore plus nette, puisque 78 % des internautes lui accordent la victoire. Pour le Times, c'est Joe Biden qui l'emporte, d'un poil.
Hmm. It is nice to find that they read the same invasion-language newspapers at Le Monde that I read, but there is not much reason to look at a summary that does not venture any independent opinion. Though it was necessary to look this once to learn that, no?
One may further learn that they take on-line polls far too seriously over there. I daresay they'll learn better.
And why not a language lesson? (0) l'élan == (not ‘zest’ but) "elk, moose" ; (1) D'un poil == "(win) by a nose" ; (2) limiter la casse == "damage control" ; (3) les grand titres == "BIG-PRINT HEADLINES" ; (4) travers naturels == ‘idiosyncrasies’ -- more or less, although maybe more pejoratively ‘whims’?
Finally, it is at least a curiosity that the up-market frogs should suppose London journalism understands the politics of Greater Texas better than they can. Paddy and I are not at all sure they are right.
I cannot off-hand find either the Wall Street Jingo poll or the Times of Murdoch ditto, although the latter organ strikes an interesting blow of its own for the militant extremist GOP. In collaboration with the DailyTorygraph.
Anyhow, "it was not a debate." On that basis, the big campaign news for Thursday, 2 October 2008, was that J. Sidney has given up on Michigan. Laus Deo.
Happy days.
Juan,
This column makes an important point that we didn't really have a debate at all. That means that commentary on the "debate" is mostly a waste of time, more of the wasted media coverage.
Please try to get wider coverage of your post. Could you post it on Daily Kos under your name? Or put it up as a short note on salon.com?
Or send it to Kieth Olberman, or maybe PBS so you can get on TV right away on this?
Keep up the great work.
Don Utter
Columbus, OH
She should be lambasted for the "heaven is the reward" for Biden's wife comment. Granted she probably was not referring to his dead wife but I wonder if she even knew about his tragic family history? Autistic indeed.
As I browse the remarks today, there is a blaring lack of notice of how she answered the question that asked her to be self critical. If there is one character flaw that has lead this administration down the wrong paths, it is being to arrogant to engage in important self critical analysis. That is to find wrongs, admit them, and correct them.
While I think Palin showed she could be coached to learn things she did not know, I could still hear, she know little about the ME. Those who study ME policy know that there is a vast amount of information, and it is very nuanced. She could not learn it all in one weekend. And, each new piece, if observed well, should lead one to question what they thought before. Once again, we have an administration wanting to focus policy in the ME, with little knowledge of the region, culture, or history. Most frightening, they are blatantly incapable of self critical examination. So, even if policy failure, anywhere, is right infront of them, they would not be able to see it to analyze and change it.
I, however, loved Biden's response. It was very Catholic and very near my heart. It was like hearing anyone else in my family addressing such a topic. It was refreshing to be able to actually relate to a candidate.
Lastly, I was glad Biden showed he knew something everyone in America seems ignorant of: Ahmedinajad has no real power in his nation.
I do wish they would have addressed other issues, like nuclear armed, unstable Pakistan is on Iran's border. This nuclear explosion in the region started because we ok'ed India having a bomb. And, most nations want nuclear weapons for deterrence of their enemies, the problem is, we know (or care) too little of the peoples in the region, outside Israel, to credibly determine that nations are threatened or not.
It wasn't always so. From 1976 to 1984 the debates were organized by the League of Women Voters, who tried hard to organize informative debates and were able to resist party pressure to water them down. Since 1988, however, the show has been run by the Commission on Presidential Debates, whose purpose in life seems to be to cut secret deals between the two major parties, with predictable results.
So, what's the difference between Sarah Palin an a myna bird?
Sometimes, myna birds show emotion.
The interested might like to know that there is an intensive discussion, on the present subject matter, pursued on the blog of Michael Tomasky, hosted by The Guardian (Friday, October 3, 2008). The relevant address is as follows:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2008/oct/03/uselections2008.sarahpalin?commentpage=1&commentposted=1
BF.
I wholeheartedly agree with Dr. Cole. It was painful to watch Joe Biden show his ability to actually pretend that it was a debate, and Ms. Palin prove that she is ready to be the new judge on Idol. And afterward I turn on PBS and David Brooks is all over himself as if the pretty girl in school just asked him to the prom. Whaaaa? Pure relief I guess, but immediately afterward many pundits were lauding Palin while I stared incredulously at the screen wondering which parallel bizarro universe they were in.
Dead on, Juan.
Rasping myna bird? Please. Parrots rasp; mynas speak mellifluously.
"So, what's the difference between Sarah Palin an a myna bird?
Sometimes, myna birds show emotion."
Also, I'll bet a myna bird sometimes shuts up !!!
Credit where it's due:
http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2008/10/03/its-official-gop-ticket-now-winky-and-wrinkly/
She does not know what "achilles heel" means. Watch it. She Does. Not. Know. What. It.Means.
She, "winked like a bar fly."
No, she winked like a $100 hooker working the Republican National Convention right before she drops a rufie on you and robs you blind.
America be warned!!
Juan, what a beautiful piece of analysis, wonderfully expressed! If only you were in the MSM.
This is the best commentary I've seen on the "debate"; cogent, insightful, funny, with appropriate disgust.
John "the lesser of two evils" above: Why wouldn't voting for the lesser evil be better than allowing the greater to gain control, which result we got in the last election due, in part, to people like you?
PBS host Jim Mcneil said it best in a question put to political pundits Mark Shields and David Brooks: "Is this 'GIDGET GOES TO WASHINGTON' or what...?"
SAY IY AIN'T SO, JOE!
R. Koke, Redondo Beach,CA
Bad questions from an uninformed moderator - what else is new?
No questions about NAFTA and U.S. trade policy.
No questions about war and oil in the Middle East.
No questions about the increasingly consolidated media industry.
No questions about domestic surveillance and the Constitution.
No questions about the lost billions in Iraq and the rise of massive government contracting related to "Homeland Security".
No questions about corruption in government and the difference between illegal and legal bribery.
No questions about the lies that led to the invasion of Iraq, in which the press played a major role.
The press should be held accountable for what they've done - Bush could never have pulled this disaster off without their help.
As far as the "debate", the whole thing was a staged circus that ducked the real issues facing the U.S.
What would a real debate look like?
Probably your best bet would be to get Ron Paul to debate Dennis Kucinich, with the entire Daily Show news team taking turns moderating questions.
Juan, Juan, when will you ever just let it all out and quit holding back?
While I agree with your malimning of Ms. Half-Baked Alaska (bet Johnny's the apple of her eye), I believe the carnage on display in St. Louie, on Wall Street and in our Congress speaks more to the total disrepresentative and disrepsectful (of the people)low state of our government.
Were John hewing to his principles and not his lust for the "one ring to rule us all" (being Prez probably is better than sex), he would quake mightily to even think of Sexy Sarah sliding into the Oval on a magic carpet woven of the finest 25th threads.
It sure gives me the willies.
It wasn't always so. From 1976 to 1984 the debates were organized by the League of Women Voters, who tried hard to organize informative debates and were able to resist party pressure to water them down. Since 1988, however, the show has been run by the Commission on Presidential Debates, whose purpose in life seems to be to cut secret deals between the two major parties, with predictable results.
The so-called "Commision on Presidential Debates" is a private corporation headed by Frank Fahrenkopf, a former head of the Republican National Committee, and Paul Kirk, a former head of the Democratic National Committee.
In 1988, the League of Women Voters withdrew its sponsorship of the presidential debates after the George H.W. Bush and Michael Dukakis campaigns secretly agreed to a "memorandum of understanding" that would decide which candidates could participate in the debates, which individuals would be panelists (and therefore able to ask questions), and the height of the podiums. The League rejected the demands and released a statement saying that they were withdrawing support for the debates because "the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter."
During the 2000 election, the CPD stipulated that candidates would only be invited to debate if they had a 15 percent support level across five national polls. Ralph Nader, a presidential candidate who was not allowed to debate because of this rule, believed that the regulation was created to stifle the views of third party candidates by keeping them off the televised debates. Nader brought a lawsuit against them in a federal court, on the basis that corporate contributions violate the Federal Election Campaign Act.
In 2004, the CPD faced harsh criticism of their debate structure and technique. Citing the CPD's 32 page debate contract, Connie Rice on NPR's The Tavis Smiley Show called the CPD debates "news conferences," and "a reckless endangerment of democracy."
Not Autism. She displays symptoms of sociopathy.
Not one mention of China by either Biden or Palin and yet the $700 billion needed to buy Wall Street's toxic assets will most likely be raised through Treasury offers to Beijing. Our relations to China are critical to not only the day-to-day running of our economy but its future growth as well. AS the number 1 and 2 consumers of the world's oil and the top 2 producers of the atmosphere contributing (if not directly causing) global warming we must end our stupid competition with China. But no discussion at all.
I strongly agree with comments made by John Francis Lee above. Both McCain and Obama are AIPAC stooges who will put Isreal's interests above their own country.
Can we Americans have a president that has the intestinal fortitude to limit government power to prescribed Constitutional limits and who is not a surrogate for the Knesset?
It would be the dawning of a new era of American politics and perhaps at least retard somewhat our swirling descent into the toilet bowl.
BUT instead, we will have FOUR MORE WAR YEARS. Truly depressing.
"She displays symptoms of sociopathy."
No kidding! Not to mention narcissism!
uncle noel:
John "the lesser of two evils" above: Why wouldn't voting for the lesser evil be better than allowing the greater to gain control, which result we got in the last election due, in part, to people like you?
Voting "the lessor of two evils" has steadily marched "both" parties, "both" marketing personna really, to the right, until at this point I no longer acknowledge that one or the other of the evils is the lessor. There remain only turtles, all the way down.
Barack Obama was the first to publicly acknowledge that he planned warfare against Pakistan, and now the "greater" of two evils is implementing his plan!
Barack Obama crawled on his belly like a snake before the AIPAC, assuring them that if they wanted the US to go to war with Iran... their wish was his command!
Barack Obama, the $400,000,000 stooge of Wall Street, has just delivered 74% of the House Demoblican vote to the Henry Paulson/Goldman Sachs/Christopher Dodd betrayal. In fact the House Republicrat vote was just 45%... they voted DOWN this traitorous betrayal. Mirabile dictu, the Republicrats were on OUR side against the plutocrats and oligarchs, arrayed against us in a phalanx of Demoblicans.
So in fact there was more difference than usual between the "two major parties". When the corporations banged on the door, the Republicrats' knees DID NOT hit the floor. The Demoblicans knees buckled in record time. And with ill effect that will prove unmatched in the history of our nation.
And spare me your tired whine that your failures "are due to people like me". Blaming others for your own shortcomings is the hallmark of natural born losers.
I might as well say that the sorry, sorry state our country is in is due to people like you and your "lessor of two evils" stupidity.
Break the endless cycle of abuse. Stand up on your hind legs. Vote for someone you actually want to be president.
Well, to lighten this up a relevant joke you may or may not have heard:
Sarah Palin is a post turtle. A what? A port turtle. You're driving down the road and see a turtle on a fence post. That's odd, you say. But you know she didn't get up there by herself. You know she doesn't know what to do now that she's up there. The only question is, who was the damn fool who put her there.
Juan I've been reading your stuff for a long time and I know you are one of the sharpest guys around, so rarely deceived. So what's this bs about Biden? I know that you know damn well who Joe Biden is, and what he does and where he can put his "acumen and expertise"
say it ain't so Juan
"Joe Biden...is one of our foremost foreign affairs experts and legislators. His acumen and expertise are wide-ranging."
Are you talking about the same Joe Biden whose vaunted acumen and expertise leads him to talk about kicking Hezbullah - a LEBANESE nationalist group - out of Lebanon? Oh yes, kick those Lebanese nationalists out of Lebanon and send them back to where they came from! Now, that's real acumen.
And would that be the same Joe Biden who possesses such great acumen that he thinks it makes sense for the United States Congress to divide Iraq into three distinct geo-ethno-sectarian parts, despite the fact that Iraq has never in history been divided in that way, and even more despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the Iraqi people want a united country with a strong central government? Would it be THAT Joe Biden?
And is it also the same Joe Biden whose wide-ranging acumen leads him to the conclusion that the way to beat Al Qa`eda is to build a bunch of pro-American schools along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border? Is it THAT Joe Biden?
If it is that same Joe Biden, then the more I hear from him the less I am impressed with his wide-ranging acumen and expertise, at least when it comes to the Middle East and the Muslim world.
"It is almost as though she is narcissistic and unable to connect with human beings."
That level of narcissism is usually overcome around the age of 6 or 7, when the child is able to put him or herself in another's shoes. Some people have cases of arrested development and don't emotionally mature beyond that. They are commonly called psychopaths or sociopaths. ....A chilling view of Ms. Cutesy Palin, indeed....and a potential danger in the VP office that we haven't seen since Herr Cheney.
The Republicans pumped her with stock phrases, winks and Reagan quotes (and catch phrases). Ugh. Of course, your praise of Biden is odd, but there is a question for those who're going at you: who is the other viable candidate of the left, progressives or the sensible on Israel-Palestine?
"I think Palin showed she could be coached to learn things she did not know,"
I think you are being much too generous. I think what Palin showed was that she could be trained, to recite a set of canned statements - with the assistance of a set of well-organized index cards (which she was obviously sorting through and referring to throughout the "dabate"). She also showed that she could be trained to react to "trigger" words with preset stock phrases and "zingers". She did that mostly, but not always, quite skillfully.
In other words, she showed that she could be trained to deliver conditioned responses in very much the same way any animal can be trained.
It was clear that she was not giving spontaneous responses based on any knowledge of her subject, but was merely delivering the responses she was carefully trained to make.
""It is almost as though she is narcissistic"
She has a lot of the signs of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). George W. Bush appears to be a classic textbook case of NPD.
"Some people have cases of arrested development and don't emotionally mature beyond that. They are commonly called psychopaths or sociopaths."
Ah yes - the "charming" sociopath - all pretty facade, no actual structure! Palin sure appears to fit that well. Narcissists are sociopathic by definition, and are often characterized by grandiosity/hubris, and often extremely vicious vindictiveness.
"a potential danger in the VP office that we haven't seen since Herr Cheney."
Well, we've had a classic narcissist in the White House for eight years, and he has certainly surrounded himself with a gaggle of sociopathic individuals, including but not limited to Cheney, Rumsfeld, Condi Rice, and Colin Powell. So, Palin as VP would be nothing new.
Juan,
I beg to differ.
Not withstanding the discussions on Israel, the debate showed that at least Biden was on top of his game. Palin was not ready..and it showed.....but the conservatives will have a champion and a standard bearer going forward. So, let's not discount her at all.
And the Tony Award goes to …!!!
One thing last night wasn’t was a debate. It was a show. American Idol on politics.
Each candidate had a script, had performance coaches, were prepped and basically delivered their lines. Joe Biden has had a long career as a senator and be able to think on his feet and probably could have showed up and winged it. He’s been tested through two presidential races in addition to his 36 years in the US Senate and as Chairman of both the Judiciary and Foreign Relations Committees. What did the viewers learn about who Sarah Palin really is and what she thinks about issues? Nothing. All we learned about her was that she gave a performance (and a pretty good one too compared to her interviews with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric). So the Tony goes to Sarah for her performance. When you go the theater, you never think that the actors are doing anything other than speaking the lines written by the playwright, the performance guided by a director, and what the actors do is try to give a great performance. No one walks out of a theater thinking they know anything about the actors’ personal views. All they hope for is a good story, staged well, with believable performances.
All we have heard after the debate is that “she gave a great performance.” I never heard any pundits who thought she gave a great performance also say she is qualified to be the president of our United States and the leader of the free world. Not one. Does Palin have any understanding of the issues she was talking about? I wanted to jump through the TV and ask Pat Robertson if he wanted Palin to be his president. Does Robertson have confidence that she could sit across from Putin and hold her own? If the Chinese wanted to cash in their $1 trillion in US Treasury notes as an attempt at economic blackmail, what would she say to Premier Wen Jiabao? So Republicans think she gave a great performance. It’s just a performance!!!! Her running mate, depending on the stage of his cancers (which is unclear since independent medical review has not occurred to determine the stage of his melanoma) may have a 38% 10-year survival rate, and he is already eight years into the onset of his cancer. So when you look at Sarah Palin, do you see your president?
As a debate, I was very disappointed. Gwen Ifill lost control early on and never got it back. She let Sarah Palin ignore the agreed-upon ground rules, use her own rules, and Ifill did absolutely nothing to rein her back in. Biden did nothing about it either. Palin then ignored nearly all the questions asked of her and gave her programmed answers that often had nothing to do with the question asked.
Following are some of the responses to Palin I wished Biden would have given. I will use the transcript of actual comments Palin made during the debate. To see the entire transcript, go to http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/ .
PALIN: I'm still on the tax thing because I want to correct you on that again. And I want to let you know what I did as a mayor and as a governor. And I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear (emphasis mine), but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also. As mayor, every year I was in office I did reduce taxes. I eliminated personal property taxes and eliminated small business inventory taxes and as governor we suspended our state fuel tax.
WHAT BIDEN COULD HAVE SAID: Governor, let’s talk about your track record. When you were Mayor of Wasilla you raised the local sales tax, the most regressive tax that affects average families. During your term as mayor the town budget increased 63% and when you started as mayor the town of Wasilla had no debt. When you left the long-term debt of Wasilla was over $18 million. Reminds me of the Bush management of the budget.
As governor, you managed a state that would be the envy of all the other 49 governors. Citizens of Alaska pay no state sales tax, pay no state income taxes and you receive 90% of your state’s budget revenues from oil companies. Alaska is so awash in money you still have enough left over to send checks of $3,269 for every man, woman and child in your state. Your state of 670,000 citizens has also put aside a fund of over $6 billion. The toughest decision you had to make was how high should the check be. Yet you asked for Federal handouts in earmarks for the Bridge to Nowhere. You asked for, and got an earmark of $500,000 so Alaska Airlines could repaint an airplane to look like a salmon. In 2005 you got $435,000 for Alaska Christian College that only had several dozen students at the time. This year you got $282,000 for the Rehabilitation of the Alaska Crab. You requested $550 million in earmarks your first year as governor and Alaska got the highest amount per capita in earmarks than all of the other 49 states, all on your watch. In 2008 you received Federal earmarks for Alaska in the amount of $768 million. And, by the way, when you finally rejected the Bridge to Nowhere, did you ever return the money to the Federal Treasury? You’re the Queen of Earmarks. And all of a sudden you’re opposed to earmarks? Give me a break!
PALIN: I do take issue with some of the principle there with that redistribution of wealth principle that seems to be espoused by you.
WHAT BIDEN COULD HAVE SAID: In the eight years your Republican Party has been in power, the largest redistribution of wealth to the already wealthy has taken place than ever before in the history of our nation. The spread between the poorest and wealthiest is greater than ever before. The Bush tax policy, supported by Sen. McCain, rewards the rich at the expense of the middle class.
IFILL: Next question, Gov. Palin, still on the economy. Last year, Congress passed a bill that would make it more difficult for debt-strapped mortgage-holders to declare bankruptcy, to get out from under that debt. This is something that John McCain supported. Would you have?
PALIN: Yes, I would have. But here, again, there have -- there have been so many changes in the conditions of our economy in just even these past weeks that there has been more and more revelation made aware now to Americans about the corruption and the greed on Wall Street.
WHAT BIDEN COULD HAVE SAID: The bankruptcy bill was a giveaway to banks to make it more difficult for individuals and families to declare personal bankruptcy so they could rebuild their lives. It was an attempt to get blood out of a stone …and it worked. Half of all personal bankruptcies were caused by families who couldn’t pay their medical bills even though they had health insurance, not because they couldn’t pay their mortgages.
PALIN: We do have a plan for withdrawal. We don't need early withdrawal out of Iraq. We cannot afford to lose there or we're going to be no better off in the war in Afghanistan either. We have got to win in Iraq.
And with the surge that has worked we're now down to pre-surge numbers in Iraq. That's where we can be. We can start putting more troops in Afghanistan as we also work with our NATO allies who are there strengthening us and we need to grow our military. We cannot afford to lose against al Qaeda and the Shia extremists who are still there, still fighting us, but we're getting closer and closer to victory. And it would be a travesty if we quit now in Iraq.
… You guys opposed the surge. The surge worked. Barack Obama still can't admit the surge works. We'll know when we're finished in Iraq when the Iraqi government can govern its people and when the Iraqi security forces can secure its people. And our commanders on the ground will tell us when those conditions have been met.
WHAT BIDEN COULD HAVE SAID: Governor, you and John McCain keep talking about winning and victory in Iraq. Since many historians and middle east experts don’t think victory in Iraq is possible, in the terms you describe, what would you do if your vision of victory turns out isn’t attainable or possible?
And as for “winning”, that’s a term that Gen. Petraeus said in an interview with the BBC, that he didn't know if he could promise "victory," and said he didn't know if he would ever even use that word, and suggested that using it is irresponsible. Do you agree with Gen. Petraeus’s comment about using the term “victory” in Iraq?
PALIN: So that people there (Wasilla) can understand how the average working class family is viewing bureaucracy in the federal government and Congress and inaction of Congress. Just everyday working class Americans saying, you know, government, just get out of my way.
WHAT BIDEN COULD HAVE SAID: I wonder if the people of New Orleans wanted government to get out of the way when Katrina struck. Maybe what they want is for government to be competent and to be there when tragedy strikes. You want government to get out of the way and at the same time you and Sen. McCain want more regulation of Wall Street because government looked the other way while trillions of dollars in home equity was wiped out. You and Sen. McCain say that greed and corruption caused Wall Street firms to act like a casino while playing with other people’s money with little or no oversight. This slavish ideology of Government getting out of the way almost caused a financial meltdown. Sen. McCain has stated on many occasions that he believes in deregulation. So which is it: get government out of the way or put in place sensible regulations to prevent Wall Street’s excesses?
I just wish Joe Biden would have called out Palin and not let her get away with deciding what questions she will or will not answer. He allowed her to get away with scripted slogans and misinformation and he should have tried to get her off script so the real Sarah might emerge. While I know that the race is really between Barack Obama and John McCain, Sarah Palin is a heartbeat away from the presidency.
Do you really think she’s presidential?
Ed Goldman,
Sure, it would have been very satisfying to see Biden confront Palin directly on some of those things, just as it would have been very satisfying to see Obama go after McCain. However, their jobs at this point are to win the election, and that includes choosing and following a strategy that will accomplish that. It looks as though their strategy, while not as satisfying to people like you and I, is working. So, let's trust that their campaign strategists really do know what they are doing, and keep our own desires for vindication for another time.
Dear Juan, Dear Readers:
Could anyone please correct me if i'm wrong but when Biden said:
"When we kicked -- along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, "Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't know -- if you don't, Hezbollah will control it.Now what's happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel."
Now here is what i know about hezbollah in Lebanon: First, neither France nor the US has ever kicked them out of Lebanon!
Second, if i'm not mistaken, Hezbollah was already a legitimate part of the lebanese government and parliament.
Now if those two points are correct, why hasn't anyone called out senator Biden on this huge terrible foreign policy blunder?!
There is a lot at stake in this region. And i wouldn't want anyone in charge of our foreign policy in the region, who is ignorant of the region, its history and dynamics.
If those two facts are not correct, then let me apologize for my intrusion.
Respectfully,
Bruno.
Biden was the true "natural". Not this latest avatar of Palin.
You don't debate with someone who doesn't believe in debate. You don't debate with someone who thinks he/she is always right and never make mistakes. You don't debate with someone who thinks there is no such thing as evolution.
You just speak and listen to this person speak. And hope he or she will never be in a position to nominate Supreme Justices.
Post a Comment
<< Home